Washington is abuzz with speculation on who will replace Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff if he, as expected, departs to run for mayor of Chicago. Everyone has advice to offer, and most people have a favored candidate, but it’s really a choice only Obama can make. The chief of staff is first and foremost the filter between the president and everyone and everything else. They determine who gets face-time with the president, and they set up the menu of choices the president has to choose from. The most important attribute, therefore, is trust. The president has to trust that his chief of staff won’t hide bad news or skew policy options. The ideology of the chief of staff is not the most important factor. However, it would be nice if the president chose someone less prone to alienating people than Rahm Emanuel. It’s good to have someone who can knock heads and get things done, but it’s not at all clear that Emanuel’s tough-guy persona really paid off for the president.
Part of the problem has been simple lack of leverage. To really knock heads, people need to fear you or need you. There aren’t very many vulnerable Republicans left in Congress that have anything to fear from a Democratic president. That will probably change (in the House) after the midterm elections. Some new Republican congresspeople will serve in blue districts that will be tough to hold in 2012. New senators won’t be up for reelection until 2016, which will be the end of Obama’s second-term, so they won’t have much to fear.
If the Democrats do better than expected in November, it may be useful to have a chief of staff who can work well with Republicans and craft compromise legislation. But, if the Democrats do poorly, the president is going to need a knife-fighter with brass knuckles. Unfortunately, Obama may have to decide on a replacement before he gets to see the outcome of the elections. He’ll be tempted to use the position as a way to fire up the base. But, obviously, the position is too important to be filled based on the political considerations of the moment.
I’d like to see someone fill the position who doesn’t piss off progressives. That shouldn’t be too hard, although our capacity to gripe in near infinite. Find someone who won’t call us names, for starters. I’d shy away from people who have been lobbyists, too. Above all, pick someone you trust and who won’t give you a bunch of bad press. And if they don’t work out? No big deal. Find someone else.
